Got to keep the sports debate alive by discussing a NFL topic that needs to be addressed. Most people are led to believe that there is a clear and obvious answer, probably due to public perception. The perception is that people evaluate who is better by saying "Who has more championships?" This is literally the worst claim in the world when it comes to evaluating who is better. This is because football is a team sport and if the rest of your team is bad, then it doesn't matter how good the quarterback is you won't be that successful. So, if you switched teams and Eli played for Dallas and Romo played for the Giants, would either have won a Superbowl? I suspect that Eli would not and Romo would have a chance because Giants are a better TEAM. My point is that Romo is more productive quarterback and a much better quarterback than Eli. If you want to look at the stats and argue the stats...go ahead because Romo beats Eli outright when it comes down to stats. To clarify where Eli ranks among quarterbacks he is the 8th best quarterback in the league and Romo is the 6th best when incorporating career and future productivity (years left to play at a high level). Plain and simple Tony Romo > Eli Manning!